NEW DELHI: The Video Assistant Referee (VAR) has been under the scanner in the ongoing FIFA World Cup in Qatar. The man versus machine debate is on with the purists insisting that the human eye is better than the technological one. Ever since VAR came into play, some of its decisions have been questioned by one of the playing teams.
The most ‘blatant error’ by the much vaunted VAR was in Japan’s game against Spain on December 2, in which Japan’s winning goal by Ao Tanaka seemed to be ‘very controversial’ as the pass by Mitoma seemed to be from the ball outside the touchline. The referee signalled ‘no goal’ since it was evident that the ball had crossed over line.
No sooner had Japan scored, the Spanish team went to the referee and it was referred to the VAR referee, Guriera of Mexico, who ruled that the curvature of the ball was in – keeping with the spirit of the game than the technical veracity. Despite lakhs of people in the world having seen that the ball was out, the technical eye made the ruling based on a technical probability – that the curvature of the ball was hanging in the line – which meant that the ball was still in play, resulting in the Japanese goal being upheld.
Problem with technology
This drew harsh rebuttal from Spanish chief coach Lius Enrique, who quipped: “It (the photo) is not real. It has to be tampered,” thus questioning the very basis on which the VAR decision was given.
“That’s the problem with modern technology. It somehow seems to defy what is clearly so evident to the human eye… There seems to be a mismatch… One has to understand that electronic eye has its limitations. No matter how many cameras one can have (the VAR is mainly based and supported by various cameras mounted all around the stadium), one can’t quite guarantee 100 per cent accuracy, meaning all the angles can’t be possibly covered,” said R Venkatesan, who has been in the technical committee of the All India Football Federation.
There is another school of thought regarding the VAR; and that is the human decision should be final and standing. This means that in case of doubt, the referee can refer to the VAR, but then let the referee take the final call.
